In the Space SE question Are Starlink satellites flaring? there’s a comment to the effect:
I’ve given up astrophotography because not a single image can be taken that is not strikken out.
My question there is specifically about the satellite flare phenomenon, but the discussion in comments is about the greater problem of starlink satellites, both in their frequent orbital boost stage when they can be pretty close and have one orientation, and when they are in their final orbital altitudes.
Satellites in LEO (low Earth orbit) are only really visible when they are sunlit, so ones like Starlink that are only a few hundred kilometers above Earth are only simultaneously illuminated by the Sun and viewable from Earth’s surface for periods after sunset and before sunrise, and more towards the west and the east, respectively.
So is it true that for amateur astrophotography, say wide field exposures, things are currently so much worse due to the Starlink satellites up there now that it’s almost hopeless to obtain a nice result without a Starlink or three in it?
Or, for the longer exposures, do people generally do image stacking (without, or with an equatorial mount) for reasons of saturation and noise as well as motion, and actually Starlinks up there now have not made things substantially worse (yet) or almost hopeless?